Search
Haunted: The Incredible True Story of a Canadian Family's Experience Living in a Haunted House
Book
It was an irrational decision. Despite having just moved into a beautiful new house, the Williams...
Merissa (14020 KP) rated Landscape of a Marriage in Books
Aug 2, 2021 (Updated Jul 17, 2023)
LANDSCAPE OF A MARRIAGE is a historical fiction story based on true events and people. In fact, the author is distantly related to one of the main characters by marriage.
Instead of focusing on the man himself, we follow his wife, Mary, and see their life through her eyes. They had good times and, undeniably, bad times too. Mary fell in love with her husband of convenience, and he, with her. That led them to a life of adventure and hardship, love and loss.
This was a great read, full of freeze-frame moments, stuck in time. The emotions come across clearly and help move this character-driven story forward. Some of the real-life events were glossed over slightly and I would have liked to have known more, but then, was Mary involved in them anyway?
I will admit to getting lost in the times given. I relied on Mary to tell me that Marion had grown, or that John was now forty-one, as there was no way I would remember from just seeing dates at the beginning of each chapter.
This was a historical fiction novel that I enjoyed and have no hesitation in recommending.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Aug 2, 2021
Instead of focusing on the man himself, we follow his wife, Mary, and see their life through her eyes. They had good times and, undeniably, bad times too. Mary fell in love with her husband of convenience, and he, with her. That led them to a life of adventure and hardship, love and loss.
This was a great read, full of freeze-frame moments, stuck in time. The emotions come across clearly and help move this character-driven story forward. Some of the real-life events were glossed over slightly and I would have liked to have known more, but then, was Mary involved in them anyway?
I will admit to getting lost in the times given. I relied on Mary to tell me that Marion had grown, or that John was now forty-one, as there was no way I would remember from just seeing dates at the beginning of each chapter.
This was a historical fiction novel that I enjoyed and have no hesitation in recommending.
** same worded review will appear elsewhere **
* A copy of this book was provided to me with no requirements for a review. I voluntarily read this book, and the comments here are my honest opinion. *
Merissa
Archaeolibrarian - I Dig Good Books!
Aug 2, 2021
Worlds Apart: A Muslim Girl with the SAS
Alisha Khan and Azi Ahmed
Book
By the age of twelve, Azi Ahmed had been fully trained in all the skills her mother thought...
Trust Exercise: A Novel
Book
Pulitzer Finalist Susan Choi's narrative-upending novel about what happens when a first love between...
Norco '80: The True Story of the Most Spectacular Bank Robbery in American History
Book
In the spirit of Killers of the Flower Moon and The Onion Field, Norco ’80 is a gripping true...
Who Okayed This?! The Riveting Life of Grant Davis
Book
"A must-read thriller! Based on true events!" You know the saying ” Keep your friends close but...
thriller true crime bookbuzz
ClareR (6236 KP) rated The Christie Affair in Books
Apr 1, 2022
The Christie Affair is a reimagining of the real disappearance of Agatha Christie - I actually had to do a quick internet search to see if any of this novel was true. It’s not. Agatha Christie really did go missing for 11 days, though. Her husband really did leave her for another woman (I have no idea if she was younger). But I thoroughly enjoyed it nonetheless!
This novel tells the story from the point of view of the mistress. Nan O’Dea (Nancy Neele in real life) gives her version of events: who she is, her past, why she became Archie Christie’s mistress, and why she is destroying their marriage. It’s all compelling reading. She has her reasons, and you can see why she has done what she has - but is it true?
It was fascinating hearing the story from the mistress’ point of view, and I really enjoyed reading about Nan’s early years, even though they were tragic. We see her going to help on a family farm in Ireland as a teenager, and a stay at a convent, reminiscent of a Magdalen Laundry (not quite). Then she returns to London and tries to rebuild her life.
You can never be quite sure as the reader, whether Nan is really telling Agatha’s side of the story, or whether she’s making it up. She’s a thoroughly unreliable narrator - but I liked that. The characters were really well developed, and it was an exciting story. Recommended!
This novel tells the story from the point of view of the mistress. Nan O’Dea (Nancy Neele in real life) gives her version of events: who she is, her past, why she became Archie Christie’s mistress, and why she is destroying their marriage. It’s all compelling reading. She has her reasons, and you can see why she has done what she has - but is it true?
It was fascinating hearing the story from the mistress’ point of view, and I really enjoyed reading about Nan’s early years, even though they were tragic. We see her going to help on a family farm in Ireland as a teenager, and a stay at a convent, reminiscent of a Magdalen Laundry (not quite). Then she returns to London and tries to rebuild her life.
You can never be quite sure as the reader, whether Nan is really telling Agatha’s side of the story, or whether she’s making it up. She’s a thoroughly unreliable narrator - but I liked that. The characters were really well developed, and it was an exciting story. Recommended!
Heather Cranmer (2721 KP) created a post
Nov 3, 2021
156Reviews (7 KP) rated True History of the Kelly Gang (2019) in Movies
May 1, 2020
One of the main things that divides opinion on Ned Kelly is was he on the side of good or bad? Some see him as a kind of freedom fighter, standing up to the British, who at the time that looked to suppress and demean the Australian people. Some see him as a criminal, who murdered innocent people for reasons known only to him. Both of these opinions may be true, neither of them might be, but it's one hell of a gamble to base a film on someone that divides opinion that much.
It's a gamble that doesn't pay off, the team behind the film try to sell it as a punk-esque, spit in the face of authority tale of a guy standing up against the establishment. The soundtrack is on-point, but that's about it. George Mackay (as Ned Kelly) does his best to sell it, but the film-makers never truly drive home the idea that this was a man of the people, someone speaking up for the downtrodden, instead Ned spends most of the films run-time with his family in their home, seemingly away from civilisation entirely, taking away from the Robin Hood-like mythology of the man. Without any other characters, Robin Hood is just a man who steals from people. A story about a thief, who becomes a murderer, who becomes a gang leader who incites others to kill, doesn't exactly evoke much sympathy, especially as these are based on real life events. Even if the film denies this by stating “Nothing you are about to see is true” at the start, despite “True History” being in the title of the film.
Some of the cast do their best to with what they are given, but some fall short, and some are just wilfully underused, Thomasin McKenzie, who has been great in recent films such as JoJo Rabbit and Leave No Trace is barely given anything to do other than play “The Woman” despite many important events revolving around her, opposite to this is Charlie Hunnam, who is given ample things to do, but seems to still be playing the same character from his recent The Gentleman performance. George Mackay is a force to be reckoned with, but its a performance that would be better placed in a sex pistols biopic than in 1800's Australia. The shining performance in this is Nicolas Hoult, shaking off his nice guy image to play the corrupt Constable Fitzpatrick, who seems to delight in the power he has and when events stop going Fitzpatrick's way, Hoult commits to playing a man on the edge of completely losing control with surprising conviction and menace, his interrogation scenes being and uncomfortable highlight in an otherwise unconvincing film.
With no mention of the two years Kelly spent on the run, being hidden from the police by a network of sympathisers, and by showing his plight as a very personal experience instead of showing it as an example of the culture at the time, the film misses an opportunity to make a legend of the man, and instead falls short of greatness.
It's a gamble that doesn't pay off, the team behind the film try to sell it as a punk-esque, spit in the face of authority tale of a guy standing up against the establishment. The soundtrack is on-point, but that's about it. George Mackay (as Ned Kelly) does his best to sell it, but the film-makers never truly drive home the idea that this was a man of the people, someone speaking up for the downtrodden, instead Ned spends most of the films run-time with his family in their home, seemingly away from civilisation entirely, taking away from the Robin Hood-like mythology of the man. Without any other characters, Robin Hood is just a man who steals from people. A story about a thief, who becomes a murderer, who becomes a gang leader who incites others to kill, doesn't exactly evoke much sympathy, especially as these are based on real life events. Even if the film denies this by stating “Nothing you are about to see is true” at the start, despite “True History” being in the title of the film.
Some of the cast do their best to with what they are given, but some fall short, and some are just wilfully underused, Thomasin McKenzie, who has been great in recent films such as JoJo Rabbit and Leave No Trace is barely given anything to do other than play “The Woman” despite many important events revolving around her, opposite to this is Charlie Hunnam, who is given ample things to do, but seems to still be playing the same character from his recent The Gentleman performance. George Mackay is a force to be reckoned with, but its a performance that would be better placed in a sex pistols biopic than in 1800's Australia. The shining performance in this is Nicolas Hoult, shaking off his nice guy image to play the corrupt Constable Fitzpatrick, who seems to delight in the power he has and when events stop going Fitzpatrick's way, Hoult commits to playing a man on the edge of completely losing control with surprising conviction and menace, his interrogation scenes being and uncomfortable highlight in an otherwise unconvincing film.
With no mention of the two years Kelly spent on the run, being hidden from the police by a network of sympathisers, and by showing his plight as a very personal experience instead of showing it as an example of the culture at the time, the film misses an opportunity to make a legend of the man, and instead falls short of greatness.